May 2010

May 31, 2010

Bob Bradley is a smart man. As the coach of the U.S.
World Cup team headed for South Africa on Monday, Bradley has to be pretty
sharp. So when listening to the coach speak after games it’s best to listen to
the words he’s not saying as opposed
to what is said.

Now this isn’t to say that Bradley is performing avant
jazz by bebopping and scatting confusing and cryptic phrases on our ears. No,
far from it. However, following the 2-1 victory over the national team from
Turkey on Saturday afternoon at the Linc, it was evident that the coach
believes his team has some more work to do before its first match against
England on June 12.

Again, Bradley wasn’t hiding anything, but then again he
really didn’t have to. There was no conspiratorial tone from Bradley whatsoever.
Still, it seemed as if Bradley was trying to sell the notion that everything
was going to be OK.

Certainly that’s a relative term when it comes to U.S.
soccer in international competition. Still, based on the team’s painful 0-3
showing in the last World Cup and the experience of the players on the current
roster, Team USA has to be a little better than OK. It’s the round of 16 or
bust in South Africa for the U.S.

Still, Bradley touched on a few themes after Saturday’s
game against Turkey. Call them buzzwords for a lack of a better term. Based off
a first half where Turkey clearly outplayed the U.S. and took a 1-0 lead into
the locker room and a second half where Bradley’s team dominated the action, those terms were reaction, transition, response and most importantly, understanding.

In other words, Bradley is still doing a lot of team
building and teaching with his team with the World Cup to begin in 11 days.

“The type of game we were in pushed the team very hard
and that’s what you want from a game like today,” Bradley said. “The response,
especially in the second half, was a strong one. We did a good job pushing
through the second goal, we had a couple of chances to get the third goal, but
when you consider everything that’s gone on the last few weeks it puts us in a
good position and I think now we’re ready to move on to South Africa.”

See, he thinks
the team is ready. Bradley knows there are still plenty of question marks with
his team, and though the game against Turkey ended well, it should be noted
that it is not a team that will be competing in the World Cup and is currently
rated 29th in the latest FIFA world rankings. So when Bradley talks
about the team pacing itself during the first half it raises an eyebrow
considering goalie Tim Howard exploded out of the penalty area to bark at a teammate
for some perceived lackadaisical defense.

If the U.S. team was pacing itself, someone forgot to
tell Howard.

“We were a little all over the place,” Howard said. “I’ve
been saying that’s been something we have to try to get better at, and we don’t
have a lot of time to do it.”

Of course there is the notion that the U.S. team was
still trying to figure out some things. During the first half the team looked
slow and disorganized—reaction and response as Bradley pointed out—but when the
coach subbed in Jose Torres and Robbie Findlay and paired them with star
midfielders Landon Donovan and Clint Dempsey, everything clicked.

In that regard, yes, there was an understanding of what
the team can do and who can do it. That will be valuable when the team gets
going in South Africa—especially considering the team has a favorable draw in
its group. Sure, England is No. 8 in the FIFA rankings (the U.S. is 14th),
but there are two winnable games against Slovenia (23rd) on June 18
and Algeria (31st) on June 23. Potential opponents in the round of
16 are Australia (20th), Ghana (32nd), Serbia (16th)
and the always tough Germany (6th).

No, the U.S. is not going to win the World Cup. At least
not until the next Kobe Bryant and LeBron James opt for soccer instead of other
sports.In other words, this could be a very good year for U.S. Soccer… that is
if it can take care of a few issues before the games start. That means no more
repeats of the first half of the game against Turkey in Philadelphia.

“It was a slap in the face what happened in the first
half and they hit us hard,” Howard said. “They were getting too many chances,
too many good opportunities and good looks that we had to tighten up. …”

Like Howard said, there isn’t a lot of time to iron it
out, but Bradley remains positive. He has to.

“There’s a lot of things on the field to build on, a real
good push when we got behind and in the end a good heartfelt win against a good
team so, in that regard, we accomplished a lot,” the coach said.

Carlos Ruiz runs pretty well for a catcher. No, he’s not going to go from first to third on a single hit in front of the right fielder. He’s also not going to steal too many bags or stretch a double into a triple. That’s just not his game.

But Ruiz will always run full out even for something as simple as backing up first on a grounder to second. In fact, catching Ruiz in a forgetful state is a rarity. If he needs to be somewhere he will get there as quickly as possible.

That’s an important role on a team as good as the Phillies. After all, when the team clinches a spot in the playoffs or World Series, it needs someone like Ruiz to hustle to the mound in order to wrap up the pitcher into a bear hug. The best example of this was after Brad Lidge threw that slider past Eric Hinske to end the 2008 World Series. Not even a beat after the ball hit his glove, Ruiz was up and sprinting toward Lidge. Two steps into his dash, Ruiz flung his mask aside like he would if he were chasing down a foul pop behind the plate. A couple more steps and he had collided into Lidge’s arms seconds before Ryan Howard and the rest of the team buried him.

Ruiz is eerily consistent, too. After the Phillies sewed up the NLDS and NLCS in 2009, he was right there on top of Lidge by the time the last out was recorded. Certainly there’s rarely a time before the playoffs begin where a party starter like Ruiz is needed, however, because the Phillies have been so good lately the catcher has ironed out his routine pretty quickly. Undoubtedly, those abilities came in handy on Saturday night after Roy Halladay finished up his perfect game in Miami.

So when Ronny Paulino hit a sharp grounder to Juan Castro at third, Ruiz took a route to back up the play not too far from the base line so that when Howard picked the throw he could be a few steps closer to mob Halladay.

And just like in the postseason, Ruiz dashed toward his pitcher with his arms, eyes and mouth wide open. It’s almost as if any great moment can be officially complete for the Phillies unless there’s that shot of Ruiz running with unbridled joy bursting through the picture.

Just don’t take this as proof that Ruiz is some M.L. Carr type waving a towel and firing up the crowd, guess again. Not only could Ruiz get to an All-Star Game—thanks in part to all those sellouts at Citizens Bank Park—but he very well could be on the way to establishing himself as the best Phillies catcher ever.

OK, that’s a bit of bold line considering Ruiz is in his fourth full season in the majors with a .251 lifetime batting average and is already 31-years old. Actually, the fact that he even made it to the big leagues at all is a testament to his fortitude. Shifted to catcher even though he was signed as an infielder, Ruiz fought against himself and the position to succeed. As a result, he got the nickname, “Chooch,” because he used a derivation of that term as a self-insult to not be afraid of the ball when turning into a catcher.

Not only did a nickname emerge from the veritable trial by self-masochism in a mask, but also a really good catcher arrived, too. Initially, Ruiz was seen as a stop-gap or transitional backstop between Mike Lieberthal and some other guy. The problem with that idea was no other guy emerged. Sure, maybe someone will come along soon, but no time soon.

That means more Chooch… and that’s good.

So aside from his ability to get to the mound quickly, Ruiz is the catcher the Phils’ pitchers love to throw to. Watching Halladay in interviews after his perfect game, he was quick to give credit to his catcher.

“I can't say enough about the job that Ruiz did tonight, really," Halladay told reporters. I felt like he was calling a great game up until the fourth or fifth, and at that point, I just felt like I'd let him take over and go with him. He did a great job. Like I said, it was kind of a no-brainer for me. I'd just go out, see the glove and hit it."

It’s always big deal to Ruiz. Bullpen coach and catching instructor Mick Billmeyer says if there is one fault Ruiz has in his game it’s that he cares a lot. If a pitcher has a bad outing, Billmeyer says Ruiz looks at it as a reflection on him. Even when pitchers shake him off, Ruiz takes it seriously.

Indeed, he is a serious man. So much so that when asked which catcher he is most impressed with in the majors, Billmeyer's answer was quick and to the point.

"I like our guy," he said.

Now where does Ruiz rank amongst the past Phillies’ catchers? He doesn’t have as much experience as guys like Darren Daulton, Bob Boone, Andy Seminick, Clay Dalrymple and Lieberthal, but his career averages are just as good in most offensive categories. The difference is unlike Boone and Lieberthal, Ruiz doesn’t have a Gold Glove Award, but even there it’s just a matter of time.

Meanwhile, though Ruiz has been dealing with a sore shoulder he’s hitting this season like he usually does in the playoffs. Better yet, in 38 games Ruiz leads the league in pitches seen per plate appearance and is second in on-base percentage.

In other words, he’s a hitter now, too.

He’s a catcher first, though. When it comes to that, Ruiz spent the night after Halladay’s perfect game on the phone with his mother in Panama reliving the big night.

“It was special for me,” Ruiz told reporters.

That’s evident, and that’s a big reason why Ruiz has endeared himself to the Philly fans. He might not look like Johnny Bench back there, but he’s going to figure out how to get it done.

May 30, 2010

May 28, 2010

NEW YORK—There is something pure and wholesome about personal restraint. It’s one of those things that can make a person stronger or sharper. Sometimes withholding an insatiable urge can even make us better.

At least that’s what they say.

So what about the Phillies’ ability to just say no to scoring runs? Sure, it flies in the face of fundamental baseball theory, but the fact that the Phillies have only been able to score in one inning out of the last 45 shows the resolve of a Tibetan monk.

Take a second to think about how difficult it is to go practically five games without scoring a run… Then take a look at the Phillies’ offense and the fact that they slugged their way into the World Series for two straight years. That makes the fact that the Phillies have been shut out by the Mets in three straight games that much more incredible.

Charlie Manuel figured his guys would get one by accident on Thursday night against the Mets at CitiField. How could they not score one off Mike Pelfrey with runners at the corners, one out and the crafty Placido Polanco coming to the plate? It’s been well documented here and in other spaces that Polanco is one of those gritty ballplayers who do all the little things that don’t show up in the box score. He’ll hit the ball the other way, put it in play, and take a few pitches to extend the inning to allow his teammates to get a look at a pitcher’s repertoire.

Except, of course, when he doesn’t.

With the tying run on third base ready to dash home and put the Phillies in a game for the first time in nearly a week, Polanco didn’t hit the ball the other way. He also didn’t do any little things that don’t show in the box score or take some pitches. He didn’t do any of that. Instead, Polanco grounded into a double play to end the team’s best chance to score a run.

The ol’ GIDP shows up in all of those expanded box scores these days.

It’s not fair to pick on Polanco though, especially since he seems to taking it so hard. After last night’s game he admitted that he was incredibly frustrated by the team’s extraordinary restraint and didn’t attempt to mask his displeasure. Jayson Werth, contrarily, dealt with the frustration by shaving off nearly all of the hair from his face. But in his first game with smooth cheeks, Werth made five outs in four plate appearances by striking out three times and grounding into an inning-ending double play when he was able to make contact.

“No matter how you want to spin it, we're still in first place and we've got a real good ballclub,” Werth said.

Werth is right about that, and that’s what makes this uncanny ability to hold back so much more amazing. Figuring that the purification process in nearly complete, the Phillies are probably a game or two away from an offensive explosion. That’s how it always happens, right?

“Sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes the bear eats you,” Manuel said, but not in a way like Sam Elliott. It would have been better if he sounded like Sam Elliott.

Nevertheless, as written after the game: And sometimes you don’t eat at all.

At least that’s the case for a father and husband from Northeast Philly named Mike Meech. You see, so dedicated to his team is Meech that he decided to go through a purification process of his own just like the Phillies by staging a hunger strike until the team deigns it necessary to score a run. Since 5:15 p.m. on Wednesday, Meech has not eaten a crumb of food. Reports indicate that he purchased a stromboli for $15 to feast upon when the time was right, but Polanco, Werth and the rest of the Phillies had other ideas.

So now Meech is entering a world of pain. Mark it zero, dude. By the time the Phillies dig in against the Marlins on Friday night it will be more than 48 hours into the hunger strike. Needless to say, he’s fragile… he’s very fragile, man. He needs some nourishment and that stromboli is getting rotten waiting for the Phillies to score a run.

So we have to ask: Has the whole world gone crazy? Is Meech the only one who gives a bleep about the rules? A man has to take up a cause from time to time, and our friend Meech has decided that if the Phillies are going to go down, he’s going with them. Undoubtedly Charlie Manuel can appreciate the plight of one of his biggest boosters considering ol’ Chuck has decided to show more restraint when it comes to his diet, too. In fact, Charlie has been imbibing on a certain brand of diet food, which makes a hunger strike more preferable by comparison.

So when you’re sitting down to watch the Phillies tonight, think of Meech. Better yet, make a sort of Lenten appeal by standing with a man who has put his team’s welfare in front of his own. That’s right, I’m telling you to put down that fork and that hillock of food compressed into a box or a bowl and do the right thing.

May 27, 2010

NEW YORK — It’s nothing new that the Phillies are the
talk of baseball. Get to the World Series two years in a row and win the NL
East three straight years and there’s a tendency for others to do a little
gabbing. That’s just the way it goes.

Still, the Phillies could not have imagined that some of
the guys on other clubs as well as the national media types would be talking
about them the way they have over the past couple of weeks.

As Charlie Manuel says, “Not good…”

It’s bad enough that the team has been shut out twice in
a row by the Mets and three times in the last four games, but it’s not
worrisome. Teams go through those offensive funks every season and the Phillies
are no different. Sure, the hitters “stink right now,” as Ruben Amaro Jr. put
it on Wednesday, but stink happens. The 15 runs in the last eight games swoon
will be corrected because all that stuff evens out.

But what should folks be worried about with these
Phillies? Well, there’s a bunch of things. It’s never good when the manager complains
of listlessness and malaise from the team during the slump. The fact that
Manuel closed the clubhouse doors for a little chat after the latest loss to
the Mets is a pretty good kick in the pants—probably a better reality check than
the 13-0 on the scoreboard the past two games.

Eventually, however, the Phillies will hit. There’s no
fear in that. Sure, it might start with one of those home run feasts the team
is known for where the majority of the scoring comes from a few bombs, but
whatever. It’s worked so far. Instead, the fact that other teams and making fun
of the Phillies is a big warning sign of where the team is…

They are a big-market club just like the Yankees and Red
Sox.

Look no further than the message on a t-shirt seen in the
Rockies clubhouse this week with a not-so veiled shot at the Phillies:

[Note: word is the guys behind the shirt are from the popular site, Zoo With Roy. They sent one to Rockies' manager Jim Tracy and outfielder Ryan Spilborghs had one in his locker. See, you never can have enough quality t-shirts.]

Put it this way—they aren’t making up shirts disparaging
the Royals or the Pirates. Nope, that only works for the Yankees and Red Sox,
which should serve notice to the Phillies that they are one of those teams. Sure, they knew as much
already considering it’s tough to go to the World Series two years in a row
without going unnoticed. But maybe the Phillies were unaware that other players,
teams and fans saw them as arrogant.

C’mon, admit it… if Shane Victorino was on another team
you’d look at him the way you saw Matthew Barnaby or Danny Ainge.

Remember when Phillies fans took delight in being the
spoiler? Those were trite and sad times that did nothing more than to
illustrate how mediocre the team was. Like there was that series at the Vet in
1986 where the Mets came in with a chance to clinch the NL East only to go away
with the champagne still on ice. Or there was that Labor Day game where Curt
Schilling beat the Yankees with 15 strikeouts. Ultimately they were defiant,
fist-in-the-air moments that added up to nothing.

Taking pleasure in slowing the trip of people going
somewhere doesn’t change the fact that you are still a loser.

That’s not the Phillies anymore. They are the team going
somewhere while a bunch clubs like the Mets are trying to ruin the fun. They’re
making up t-shirts and everything.

So what’s the plan? How can the Phillies turn 84 home
games, tasers, Roy Halladay and the opposition’s signs into quiet respect and
humble goodness instead intense dislike and unrepentant arrogance?

Tough one, huh?

How about this: when another manager tells the media that
your team is a bunch of jerks, don’t rub his nose in it and tell him to, “quit
crying.” If someone wants to be a jerk there’s no sense matching that behavior.
Nobody wants to watch a jerk competition[1].

Another good idea is to not trade former American League
Cy Young Award winners. That’s just the height of arrogance, isn’t it? Imagine
believing your team is so good that it can send away a pitcher who produced the
greatest postseason in team history since Grover Cleveland Alexander for a
bunch of prospects. How are the teams that don’t have any Cy Young Award
winners going to view that?

And how are they going to react when they get two
shutouts in a row against you?

If the Phillies had legit trade bait aside from Domonic
Brown, I’d suggest trading to get Cliff Lee or Roy Oswalt and wait for the bats
to come alive. I’d also try to remember that what comes around goes around.
Nothing lasts forever, folks. Someday the Phillies will be back trying to knock
off good teams going somewhere.

Anyway, we’re here at CitiField waiting to see what
Charlie has to say a day after his meeting. Be back soon…

[1]
There are more pithy ways to describe this contest that are more suitable to
the popular nomenclature, but we’ll just leave that for Meech or Deitch.

May 26, 2010

I was looking for some insight, maybe even some
perspective. It’s for good reasons, too, considering I like to have some level
of knowledge before I pop off about something. That’s not a popular sentiment
in some areas of our popular discourse these days, but whatever. I’m old
fashioned like that.

So in digging through my archives, I set out to try to figure
out if there is a connection between the 1987 Flyers that lost the Stanley Cup
Final to the Edmonton Oilers juggernaut in seven games, and the Flyers team
that will face off against Chicago on Saturday night. Are those teams and this
group at all similar? Is there anything tying together their trips through the
playoffs?

In a word, no.

First of all, it’s incredibly odious to compare teams
from different eras. Don’t believe me? Then go watch the HBO documentary on the
Broad Street Bullies or are a classic hockey game from a decade ago for comparisons
sake. What you will find is that today’s game is so much faster. It’s almost
like watching Borg and McEnroe play tennis with wood rackets compared to
Federer and Nadal with modern equipment.

Even though the game is different, the drama has not
changed a bit. In 1987, the Flyers dropped the opening two games to Edmonton
and were trailing 3-0 in Game 3 at the Spectrum before winning three of the
next four games to force Game 7. Rookie Ron Hextall, the losing goalie, won the
Conn Smythe Trophy, and was suspended for the first eight games of the
following season for teeing off on Kent Nilsson as if he were a Titleist and
his goalie stick were a 3-wood.

The game moves too fast now, but it would be difficult to
draw any comparisons with the Oilers team that won the Cup. There were seven future
Hall-of-Famers on the Oilers that season, including Wayne Gretzky and Mark
Messier.

Seven Hall of Famers on one team is an anachronism from
the days when there was no such thing as a salary cap, so it’s wise to leave it
in the past.

Which is probably a good idea considering the way guys
like wrote off the Flyers at the end of the regular season. For instance, on
this very site I reasoned that it might not be a bad idea for the Flyers to
fall flat on their faces and regroup during the off-season. Playoffs?

Check it out:

Is it simply a
matter of trimming some payroll and adding some different players? Were the
injuries too much to bear? Is the chemistry all wrong? How about all of the
above?

Would a collapse that results in the Flyers not making the playoffs be the best
tonic for the long run?

We’ll find out soon enough.

Guess what? Bad idea. Perhaps it shows that the Flyers
were a team constructed for May and not October. After all, Chris Pronger has a
certain knack for getting to the Stanley Cup Final, and the injured masses have
a way of healing really quickly when no one would fault them for hanging it up
for the season. That stuff definitely defines the character of the guys on the
team.

Or maybe it says something about a sport when three of
the four times a team rallied from a 3-0 series deficit to win came in the NHL.
In hockey, anything can happen and the regular season is pretty much
meaningless. Just look at how the Flyers, as the No. 7 seed, got to the finals.
They knocked off the No. 2 seed in five games, rallied from a 3-0 deficit to
beat the Bruins, and then hosted the
conference finals against the lowest-seeded team in the tournament.

That’s the difficult question. The law of averages and
logic has to catch up sooner or later… right? After all, the Blackhawks went
through the top seed in the West to get to the finals and have won eight of
their last nine games. Moreover, the Blackhawks haven’t lost back-to-back games
since the end of March.

Are the trends going to fall apart in the Stanley Cup
Final?

Let’s just say something that has not occurred since the
Kennedy Administration will go down at the Wachovia Center next week.

Sorry, I’m going with the Blackhawks in six games. Why start betting on the Flyers now?

May 25, 2010

For those of us with a goofy, gapped-toothed grin, the subconscious takes over a lot. Those tight-lipped or mischievous grins are as much a byproduct of a genetic flaw as they are a representation of the personality.

Oh sure, Letterman and Madonna are always flashing those pearly whites, and a gap between her teeth never limited Lauren Hutton, but for the rest of us it’s just another way to build character.

Yet for Chris Pronger it’s more about being a character as it is showing character. And certainly both traits are in full force for the spiritual leader of the Stanley Cup Final bound Flyers. See, Pronger has no problem flashing a goofy, gap-toothed grin because maybe it’s a prideful thing for a professional hockey player. More than 16 tears into his NHL career, Pronger still has his teeth and he has a tough time refraining from showing them off.

How do we know they are real? Simple… who gets crooked false teeth with a gap between the front ones? Remember that classic, toothless smile Bobby Clarke beamed while gripping the Stanley Cup circa 1974? Yeah, well take a look at Clarkie’s smile now—they’re straight as an arrow and whiter than a model in toothpaste commercial.

So what’s the deal with Pronger and that wacky sense of humor that makes him want to show off those chiclets? Is the guy ever serious, or is it that he just can’t help himself? Whatever it is, good or bad, it’s as clear as that goofy smile that Chris Pronger loves to play hockey.

“You can’t get too focused on one game,” Pronger said, flashing a wry smile at a reporter. Then again, that’s pretty much how every interview with Pronger goes. They are partially a battle of wits mixed with an exhibition of ironic humor and some astute hockey knowledge mixed in. The guy knows how to work a room and wear you down.

The funny thing about that is it’s almost exactly like Pronger’s style on the ice. Maybe a player can’t get too focused on the ice, but for the playoff veteran, his intensity is as sharp as a laser. Over the course of a long series, chances are Pronger will just wear out the opposition. Considering that he has been is playing a league-leading 28:48 of ice time per game and is one of three players to average better than four minutes a game on the power play (4:30) and penalty kill (4:25) throughout the playoffs, Pronger knows a thing or two about how to focus.

Exemplifying this point is that during these playoffs, the Flyers are 8-0 after Game 3s. Don’t think that this doesn’t have something to do with Pronger back on the blue line.

“He's a big body right there on the ice,” teammate Simon Gagne said. “He’s tough to beat one-on-one. He blocks shots and plays very well on the power play. He’s the full package. Now that it’s playoff time, he's able to play more minutes right now.”

The result is that 8-0 as a series wears on, and a down-to-earth perspective that seems a bit extraordinary for a guy with two Olympic gold medals, a Hart Trophy, a Stanley Cup and a chance to add a second one with his third appearance in the finals with his third different team.

When the Flyers traded for him, a lot of hockey pundits penciled the team into the Stanley Cup Final. But after a disappointing regular season that saw the team sneak into the playoffs by the skin of their crooked teeth, it’s hard to be surprised that the team has come this far.

Some have labeled this “The Pronger Effect.” For whatever reason Pronger’s teams are always a tough out this time of year.

“He’s the one guy I want to be playing with, not against,” forward Danny Briere said.

Well, yeah. Considering that Pronger is often voted as the league’s dirtiest player, he’s not one to tangle with. The same goes for reporters with questions, too. No matter what the circumstance, there will be a joust of some sort with Pronger stirring the pot.

Now how is it that he still has his real teeth?

Nevertheless, with an anticipated matchup with the Blackhawks’ 260-pound Dustin Byfuglien looming, Pronger has to be ready for some bone crunching and teeth rattling. But that’s the easy part. The difficulty for Pronger is trying to compare all three of the Stanley Cup Final clubs he’s played for.

The thing is, he says, the 2006 Edmonton Oilers, 2007 Anaheim Ducks and 2010 Flyers are all unique.

Do they have anything in common?

“No,” he said with the grin disappearing. “Each team has its own identity. Each team has to forge its own path.”

Once again, Pronger’s path has led him to another Stanley Cup Final. Funny how that happens.

May 23, 2010

There’s something about no-hitters or near no-hitters
that gets people to remember and talk about all the great pitched games they
have seen. Watch a game like the one Daisuke Matsuzaka pitched on Saturday
night against the Phillies and all those crazy memories come flooding back.

Dice-K came four outs away from throwing a no-hitter
against the Phillies even though the hitters smoked about a half-dozen balls
right at the defense. Finally, it was the No. 8-hole hitter Juan Castro who
broke up the no-no with a soft, broken-bat single over shortstop.

Close but not quite there.

Having seen just one no-hitter and a couple of close
ones, it would have been kind of cool to see Dice-K close it out on Saturday
night even though it would have meant a bunch more work. Considering that Kevin
Millwood’s masterpiece in 2003 was the only one I’ve seen—at any level—sure,
pile it on.

So what were the close ones?

·May 30,
1982 — The Blue Jays’ Jim Gott, in the fourth start of his career to get
his first win, went six innings against the Orioles at Memorial Stadium before
turning it over to Roy Lee Jackson to close it out. The only hit was a one-out
single in the fifth by catcher Rick Dempsey, so the game was hardly dramatic.
However, the game was historical because it was the very first game in Cal
Ripken’s epic consecutive games streak.

·Oct. 6, 1991 — Dave Hollins ended the no-hitter in the second inning with a double, but with six players in their first or second big-league season, plus the strikeout prone Dale Murphy all in the lineup, David Cone had one of those days. Cone got 19 strikeouts against the Phillies and had a chance to tie the all-time record against Wes Chamberlain and Murphy. Oddly, Cone didn't get that 20th strikeout, but he got Ks on the first six outs, struck out the side four times and didn't get a single strikeout in the seventh inning. Still, Cone had a chance to get 20 Ksin his 141-pitch three-hit shutout.

·Sept. 26,
2001 — Randy Wolf shuts down the Reds at the Vet on Larry Bowa bobblehead
night. This was back in the days when people would show up to collect their
dolly and then turn around and walk out because they were cynical about the
local ballclub. Nevertheless, this one was less dramatic than the Gott/Jackson
combo piece since the only hit Wolf allowed was to second hitter of the game.
Interestingly, the hit turned out to be the first one in the career of Raul
Gonzalez.

·May 10,
2002 — What did you think of Padilla this day? Well, he was pretty good. In
fact, the enigmatic right-hander came four outs away from throwing a no-hitter
against the defending World Champion Diamondbacks at the Vet. The first hit was
a ground-rule double by pinch hitter Chris Donnels that bounced just inside the
chalk line in left field and bounced into that area that jutted out in foul territory.
Padilla was thisclose from getting
it, but the two-hitter might be the best game of his wobbly career.

·April 27,
2003 — Kevin Millwood got it done. The part everyone forgets about this one
is that the Giants’ rookie Jesse Foppert tossed a three-hitter in just his
second career start. Fortunately for the Phillies one of those hits was a
leadoff homer from Ricky Ledee. Otherwise, Millwood might have had to go more
than nine innings to get the no-hitter.

·May 14, 2003
— This was just a two-hitter for Curt Schilling in his last start ever at the
Vet, but it was easily the most dominating pitching performance of any game on
this list. David Bell legged out a flared double in the third inning and Bobby
Abreu looped a single in the fifth, but no Phillie made solid contact. Mixed in
with those two hits were 14 strikeouts from Schilling, which wasn’t as
incredible as the fact that he threw 45 pitches that were completely missed by
the Phillies hitters. Not a no-hitter, but it could have been.

·July 25,
2004 — That chatty Eric Milton came the closest of anyone to getting a
no-hitter at Citizens Bank Park when the lefty took one into the ninth inning
only to lose it when Michael Barrett got a pop up double when center fielder
Doug Glanville got a bad read and jump on the ball. The weird part was that
manager Larry Bowa put Glanville in for defense in the ninth to replace Ricky
Ledee, who happened to make two really good plays in center field during Kevin
Millwood’s no-hitter as well as in David
Cone’s perfect game in 1999. Nevertheless, Glanville went on to misjudge
another fly ball in deep center that led to two runs for the Cubs. As a result,
Milton didn’t get out of the ninth, missed out on the win, the shutout and the
no-no. Rough day for Glanville.

·April 2,
2008 — How about this… the year the Phillies won the World Series, they lost
the first two games of the season to the lowly Washington Nationals. The Nats
won just 59 games in 2008, which means after the first series of the year they
went 57-101. One of those wins was a combined one-hitter from Tim Redding, Luis
Ayala and Jon Rauch in which the Phillies whiffed only twice and scratched out
just a second-inning single by Pedro Feliz. Worse, Cole Hamels allowed just one
run in eight innings on a homer from Ryan Zimmerman.

So aside from Kevin Millwood and the time I took a
no-hitter into the final inning of a fifth grade little league game for the
Lancaster Township Phillies against the LT Giants (10 Ks and a run before the
first hit), there really haven’t been too many near misses. Perhaps that’s why
people tend to go a little crazy over no-hitters or why guys like Charlie
Manuel don’t want to see them against his team.

According to Manuel, he has never managed a team that has
been the victim of a no-hitter. Moreover, Chuck says the only time he was on
the losing end of a no-hitter was in the minor leagues against the Cocoa Astros’
ace, Don Wilson.

Now Charlie says the no-hitter against his Orlando Twins
of the Single-A Florida State League was in 1964, but considering the fact that
Wilson only had two starts and one win in ’64, it’s more likely that Wilson’s no-hitter
against Manuel and his teammates was in 1965.

Aside from the minor detail of the year, Charlie
remembers the more important details.

“We had two people in the stands — a scout and a lady
that was selling hot dogs. Seriously,” Charlie said.

No sense selling hotdogs when the only person in the
stands is a scout, right?

“She started giving them away,” he said, noting that he
probably took one considering he didn’t get much in meal money in those days.

“I might have, but I didn’t have any meal money back in
those days,” Charlie said. “Maybe a buck and a half.”

Charlie likes to tell the story about the time he broke
up a no-hitter from Catfish Hunter if it can be called that. No, his story isn’t completely inaccurate, but it wasn’t
the most dramatic setting in baseball history, either. Manuel got Catfish with
a leadoff single in the fifth during a game in Oakland
on April 16, 1972 to start a two-run rally in a Twins’ 3-2 victory over
Catfish’s A’s.

But, technically, yes, Chuck
broke up the no-hitter. However, he might have been the only one to notice what
was happening.

May 20, 2010

Nothing has changed. Up is not down, black is not white and there are no dogs sleeping with cats. The earth still spins on its axis and righteous indignation is still the rallying cry for losers.

The truth—a very mysterious and sordid concept these days—is still very plain. Today’s revelations notwithstanding, a cooked case is still crispy and charred just so.

But yes, I still believe that if Floyd Landis and his failed drug test from Stage 17 of the 2006 Tour de France were presented on the same standards of the rule of law, it would have been thrown out of court. I also believe that if Landis were a baseball player, a football player, a golfer or any other pro athlete outside of cycling, he would be on the field right now. Like anyone else in elite sports, Landis probably was not-guilty though he was never innocent.

Maybe this is where that righteous indignation line can be reinserted. After all, everybody gets screwed at one time or another. There’s no sense whining about it and I still do not care if Landis was cocktailing HgH with winstrol and deer urine all while freezing his rest-day blood in a hyperbaric chamber. The fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution still exists. We all own it, but not if you like to ride a bike, win races or have your blood tested at the Laboratoire National de Dépistage du Dopage in Châtenay-Malabry.

Those guys…

Then again, a lot of us look pretty stupid right now.

The above section is what hasn’t changed. The part that has changed is everything else. One of the most incredible days of the Tour de France and exciting sports day I have ever seen is more than just a little tainted. Oh sure, Landis still says he did not use the synthetic testosterone he tested positive for (according to that French lab) during that fateful 17th Stage in 2006, but according to admissions published on ESPN.com by Bonnie Ford today, Landis used testosterone in previous editions of the Tour de France as well as HgH during the 2006 season.

In other words… never mind.

Oh, Landis came clean finally, unburdening himself in e-mails to cycling and doping officials and in an interview with Ford in which he claims to have started a systematic doping program in June of 2002 when he joined up with the U.S. Postal Service team. That team, of course, was the vestige of Lance Armstrong and his hand-picked manager, Johan Bruyneel, and it’s where Landis said he leaned all about the hows and whys of performance-enhancing drug use. It wasn’t just old fashioned steroids and syringes, either. Nope, Landis appeared to be more than just a dabbler.

He says he used EPO, a drug so effective it not only improves performance quickly, but it also has the potential to kill a guy if not used properly. He also admitted to using female hormones, diabetes medication and the tried-and-true blood doping, which is when a person removes some of his own blood and stashes it in a freezer only to re-inject it when seeking a boost. That’s some old-school stuff right there.

“I don't feel guilty at all about having doped. I did what I did because that's what we (cyclists) did and it was a choice I had to make after 10 years or 12 years of hard work to get there; and that was a decision I had to make to make the next step,” Landis told Ford. “My choices were, do it and see if I can win, or don't do it and I tell people I just don't want to do that, and I decided to do it.”

Certainly that’s not a statement we hear too many athletes make, let alone one who spent three years and approximately $2 million of his own money attempting to appeal his doping ban. Making the admission even more compelling is the fact that Landis says Armstrong—and many other of the top U.S. riders—were complicit and drug users just like him.

The accusations, of course, are where people start to take notice. It’s one thing to admit that you have done something wrong, but to point out the failings of others is something significant. There’s a word for people who do those types of things and that word is, “rat.” We’ll get to the rat thing in a moment.

Nevertheless, one rider who Landis says was a doper was Dave Zabriskie, who is currently leading the Tour of California. Zabriskie was a roommate and training partner with Landis in Spain. It was in Girona, Spain, the training base for Armstrong and Landis, where it is said one of the world’s most famous athletes kept his blood in a freezer for doping. It’s also there where Bruyneel is said to have schooled Landis on the use of steroid patches, blood doping and human growth hormone.

Kind of like your readin', ‘ritin’, and ‘rithmatic of doping.

The bombshell is the stuff about Armstrong, but that goes without saying. Armstrong has long been accused and suspected of using performance-enhancing drugs in order to become the most decorated cyclist in the history of the sport, but he always fought back tenaciously pointing out that like Mark McGwire or Barry Bonds, he never tested positive for drug use.

But no other rider has ever levied accusations against Armstrong, especially one as intimate to him as Landis. It’s one thing to hear whispers of Armstrong dumping Landis’ “rest-day blood” down a sink during the Tour de France to prove some sort of angry point, but it’s another completely to read the words of one of Armstrong’s closest teammates saying that he got drugs directly from him.

Landis told Ford that he gave Dr. Michele Ferrari, Armstrong’s personal trainer, $10,000 in cash for a season’s worth of doping. Six years ago Ferrari was convicted of fraud and lost his medical license in Italy, and Landis says the doctor personally extracted and re-injected his blood for him. Landis also said he and Armstrong discussed the efficacy of the then-newly developed test for EPO in 2002.

“I didn't wish to take the risks on my own and especially since it was fairly clear that his advice was endorsed by Lance himself,” Landis told Ford. “And therefore Johan and the other guys that knew of it and were involved—working with him, they'd understand the risks that I was taking as well and therefore trust me.”

Trust. That’s an interesting word, isn’t it? Why, after all these years, does the guy talk about this now? After years of refusing to cooperate or name names—you know, steadfastly choosing not to be a rat—why is Landis ratting out the old gang? After all, before he had everything to lose and yet kept his mouth shut. At least we think he kept his mouth shut though Armstrong told reporters in California this morning that he had been receiving “harassing” messages from Landis for quite some time.

Still, this morning Armstrong never said, “Floyd is a liar.” He also did not say, “I didn’t do it.” Maybe that’s beside the point.

"It's our word against his word," Armstrong said instead. "I like our word. We like our credibility. Floyd lost his credibility a long time ago."

What about Armstrong or the cycling union? Do they have any credibility? Who believes any of them at this point anymore? Armstrong might like his credibility, but it's not like Landis is the only person saying the seven-time Tour champion is a doper.

That list is long and varied.

But really… why now? Landis says he doesn’t expect anyone to believe him and it’s almost impossible for him to become a bigger pariah than he already is. The money is gone, his wife left, and his book is nothing more than a bunch of paper with words on them that are meaningless. Worse, he had to call up his mom in Lancaster County and tell her the truth.

What good is that going to do now? No team is going to hire him, the money isn’t going to come back and divorce is like toothpaste already out of the tube. When Armstrong said this morning that Landis has no credibility, it’s difficult to counter. That’s especially true when Landis admits that he does even have concrete proof and there is no paper trail or smoking gun—just some names, dates and details.

Truth? Who knows?

“I want to clear my conscience,” Landis told Ford. “I don't want to be part of the problem anymore.

“With the benefit of hindsight and a somewhat different perspective, I made some misjudgments. And of course, I can sit here and say all day long, ‘If I could do it again I'd do something different,’ but I just don't have that choice.”

No, there’s always a choice. Just because the world is a rat race doesn’t mean a guy has to be a rat. Just because a guy likes to ride his bike and play sports doesn’t mean he has to prostitute himself. Life is full of choices and a man lucky enough to have the mind to make a conscious choice is hard to feel sorry for.

May 19, 2010

Go ahead and admit it—you know you want to. As soon as it turned out that the 76ers would get the No. 2 pick in next month’s NBA Draft, your first thought was, “Great… how are they going to mess this up?”

Hey, I thought the same thing. I even asked around to some folks who are wise in the way of the NBA and the players headed into the draft. Needless to say the answers I received were uniform and succinct.

“They can’t,” was the response in how the Sixers could screw up the No. 2 pick.

But there is always an addendum tacked on at the end after that two-word answer.

“They can’t… unless they draft Shawn Bradley.”

Remember that one? Remember how the Sixers had the No. 2 pick in the 1993 draft and took a 7-foot-6 center with just one year at Brigham Young under his untested belt? Even with Anfernee Hardaway, Jamal Mashburn, Isaiah Rider, Vin Baker, Alan Houston and Sam Cassell sitting there on the board, the Sixers gobbled up the lean and lanky center that at his very best was labeled a project.

Two-and-a-half years later they finally traded away Bradley for Derrick Coleman… maybe the one instance where Coleman was the preferred alternative.

Here’s how bad the pick for Bradley was… for five seasons after the Sixers used the No. 2 overall pick on him, they were still in the lottery for five straight seasons afterwards. That’s how they were able to get Jerry Stackhouse, Allen Iverson, Larry Hughes, not to mention trading away the No. 2 pick in the ’97 draft for Jim Jackson, Eric Montross, Anthony Parker and Tim Thomas.

Quite obviously, not many of those picks worked out too well, either.

This year there is no such worry, though, mostly because there is no Shawn Bradley-type available in the 2010 Draft. It’s not a crop that is seen as particularly deep with the picks beyond the top three a guess. After Kentucky guard John Wall goes to Washington with the top pick, the Sixers are expected to take Ohio State guard Evan Turner. Essentially, Washington has the top pick while the Sixers have No. 1A.

It really is a can’t miss. In fact, last night La Salle grad and former NBA player, Tim Legler, told viewers on ESPN that Turner was the true star of the draft. Legler declared that 10 years from now we will be talking about Turner as a Hall of Famer.

That’s a pretty bold comment considering how uncertain the draft can be. For every Iverson, Charles Barkley and possibly Evan Turner, the Sixers have shown us Bradley, Sharone Wright, Charles Smith, Keith Van Horn, Marvin “Bad News” Barnes and whatever the hell that was in 1986.

Indeed, June hasn’t been the kindest month for the Sixers.

Which is why we want to know if they can mess it up? Is there a Sam Bowie to take ahead of Michael Jordan? A Kwame Brown-type poised to turn heads at the draft workouts or an Adam Morrison set to be labeled the next Larry Bird?

Can it really be this easy?

“It gives us a lot of options which is what we really need,” general manager Ed Stefanski said. “We are ecstatic. When you are at six and you move up to two it is phenomenal. We are happy campers. I just got a text from (Comcast-Spectacor COO) Peter Luukko and a text from (Comcast-Spectacor Chairman) Ed Snider; they are watching the hockey game but they were watching this too.”

Yes, apparently this is a slam dunk. If the Sixers were to take Turner, a 6-foot-7 guard with a seven-footer’s wingspan, a knack for making clutch plays, as well as what his draft media guide bio says is, “a student of the game who studies past greats and appears to have a great understanding [of the game].”

What it means for the Sixers is that Turner can pair with Jrue Holiday in the backcourt, while Andre Iguodala can move to a more natural forward spot where we won’t have to watch him brick up three-pointers on a routine basis. Turner’s addition could also make Thaddeus Young a potential draft-day trade bait, though not the type of deal that would free up cap space for a bigger move.

In other words, all the Sixers have to do is take Evan Turner. It really is that easy.